Reggie Bush story: Recieved $280,000 while at USC (1 Viewer)

[Christo]

I respect the FBG's who fall on both sides of this story but I just don't care one way or the other. A big-time NCAA athlete got some cash while still a student athlete? Shocker.Due to the rules now in place I wish it didn't occur but can't hate the guy, or make value judgments against him, based on his decision to accept money while at school.

I can. He knew the rules.ETA: Make a value judgment, not hate the guy.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

When you hear about athletes getting in trouble because they got discounts other students didnt get, Bush's story really should piss everyone off. I remember years ago, some station was doing a story on an SEC player (not picking on SEC here, but the fact that it was a major conference), and he talked about how poor he is and how he never had anything growing up. Yet in the interview, he was all decked out in fancy clothes, and had this huge new SUV that probably cost more than the house his family owned. And I remember wondering about how the school and NCAA could not know this kid was getting money under the table.

And why cant players hire agents to give them advice. i look at Slaton this year and see someone that desperately needed a guiding hand.

 

[gump]

Some perspective:

Alabama played Antonio Langham his senior year, after he signed a contract with an agent on a cocktail napkin at a bar in New Orleans late in the evening the Jan prior, hours following winning the National Championship. Langham then backed out on his deal with the agent. The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know. Langham received little if anything for the agreement.

Alabama was HAMMERED by the NCAA, receiving what was then the 2nd worst punishment in history behind SMU.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

I thought all agents had to be certified or something thru the NFL? If thats true, they need to make a 1 and done rule. You tamper with a player to the point a school/player gets penalized, and you will never be certified by the NFL. Get rid of the dirty agents and alot of problems go away. Another great reason to have a rookie salary scale.

 

[Super King]

Bush has probably been a baller since high school. He needed a little cash. Big whoop!

 

[JAA]

When you hear about athletes getting in trouble because they got discounts other students didnt get, Bush's story really should piss everyone off. I remember years ago, some station was doing a story on an SEC player (not picking on SEC here, but the fact that it was a major conference), and he talked about how poor he is and how he never had anything growing up. Yet in the interview, he was all decked out in fancy clothes, and had this huge new SUV that probably cost more than the house his family owned. And I remember wondering about how the school and NCAA could not know this kid was getting money under the table.And why cant players hire agents to give them advice. i look at Slaton this year and see someone that desperately needed a guiding hand.

Slaton had to borrow a suit to wear to the All American picture shoot this past offseason.Slaton doesnt want millions, he wants to make a team and provide for his family. Do you have any idea what the NFL minimum is? Do you have any idea what practice squad players make? Tell me more about this "guiding hand" and injuries and how much Matt Leinarts insurance policy cost so that he could stay another season at USC.Ill give you a hint about Leinart: His parents had to take a 2nd mortgage out to pay for it.Thanks for playing, gg

 

[Knight who says Ni]

From PFT:

In a recent interview with 60 Minutes (which, coincidentally, was the answer he selected on the Wonderlic question that asked "how much time is there in a half of an hour?"), Titans quarterback Vince Young said that he was angry about not winning the Heisman Trophy in 2005

...

Is he making this up, or is he serious about this?

 

[redman]

Some perspective:

Alabama played Antonio Langham his senior year, after he signed a contract with an agent on a cocktail napkin at a bar in New Orleans late in the evening the Jan prior, hours following winning the National Championship. Langham then backed out on his deal with the agent. The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know. Langham received little if anything for the agreement.

Alabama was HAMMERED by the NCAA, receiving what was then the 2nd worst punishment in history behind SMU.

Um, no:

Langham also signed and submitted an application to enter the 1993 NFL Draft, rendering him ineligible under NCAA rules, regardless of whether he had signed with an agent or not. That application was quashed in January of 1993 at the request of then-Alabama coach Gene Stallings. Stallings failed to inform the SEC or NCAA of Langham's draft application, or to declare Langham ineligible per NCAA rules. Langham played for Alabama in eleven games of the 1993 season. His actual ineligibility came to light in late November of 1993, and Alabama was eventually forced to forfeit eight wins and a tie from the 1993 season (two other games Langham played in, against LSU and Auburn, were losses on the field).

Some more "perspective".

 

[t8knovr]

Bush has probably been a baller since high school. He needed a little cash. Big whoop!

I am from SD and was here when Reggie attended Helix High. I know that Reggie was getting money from Lloyd in High School because he needed it. At USC it was an investment and Reggie knew exactly who he was dealing with. Llyod AKA "Ta-Ta" here in San Diego has been a trouble maker since the mid 90's.

 

[gump]

Some perspective:

Alabama played Antonio Langham his senior year, after he signed a contract with an agent on a cocktail napkin at a bar in New Orleans late in the evening the Jan prior, hours following winning the National Championship. Langham then backed out on his deal with the agent. The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know. Langham received little if anything for the agreement.

Alabama was HAMMERED by the NCAA, receiving what was then the 2nd worst punishment in history behind SMU.

Um, no:

Langham also signed and submitted an application to enter the 1993 NFL Draft, rendering him ineligible under NCAA rules, regardless of whether he had signed with an agent or not. That application was quashed in January of 1993 at the request of then-Alabama coach Gene Stallings. Stallings failed to inform the SEC or NCAA of Langham's draft application, or to declare Langham ineligible per NCAA rules. Langham played for Alabama in eleven games of the 1993 season. His actual ineligibility came to light in late November of 1993, and Alabama was eventually forced to forfeit eight wins and a tie from the 1993 season (two other games Langham played in, against LSU and Auburn, were losses on the field).

Some more "perspective".

The NCAA even calls it a "misunderstanding" of the rules.Langham certainly did not receive hundreds of thousands of dollars. All he did was sign a napkin, realize he made a mistake, then try to work with the coach to undo the mistake.

And Alabama gave up schollys, bowl eligibility, and wins for that misunderstanding.

I also believe the faculty representative who the NCAA said acted "unethically" sued the NCAA and won.

Two points I'd give are:

1) The NCAA has handed down VERY harsh punishments for lesser crimes than Bush is accused of.

2) The NCAA does not need proof.

 

[redman]

Some perspective:

Alabama played Antonio Langham his senior year, after he signed a contract with an agent on a cocktail napkin at a bar in New Orleans late in the evening the Jan prior, hours following winning the National Championship. Langham then backed out on his deal with the agent. The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know. Langham received little if anything for the agreement.

Alabama was HAMMERED by the NCAA, receiving what was then the 2nd worst punishment in history behind SMU.

Um, no:

Langham also signed and submitted an application to enter the 1993 NFL Draft, rendering him ineligible under NCAA rules, regardless of whether he had signed with an agent or not. That application was quashed in January of 1993 at the request of then-Alabama coach Gene Stallings. Stallings failed to inform the SEC or NCAA of Langham's draft application, or to declare Langham ineligible per NCAA rules. Langham played for Alabama in eleven games of the 1993 season. His actual ineligibility came to light in late November of 1993, and Alabama was eventually forced to forfeit eight wins and a tie from the 1993 season (two other games Langham played in, against LSU and Auburn, were losses on the field).

Some more "perspective".

The NCAA even calls it a "misunderstanding" of the rules.Langham certainly did not receive hundreds of thousands of dollars. All he did was sign a napkin, realize he made a mistake, then try to work with the coach to undo the mistake.

And Alabama gave up schollys, bowl eligibility, and wins for that misunderstanding.

I also believe the faculty representative who the NCAA said acted "unethically" sued the NCAA and won.

Two points I'd give are:

1) The NCAA has handed down VERY harsh punishments for lesser crimes than Bush is accused of.

2) The NCAA does not need proof.

Now you're changing your story. The point you were originally emphasizing was " . . . The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know." Where'd that point go?

 

[gump]

Some perspective:

Alabama played Antonio Langham his senior year, after he signed a contract with an agent on a cocktail napkin at a bar in New Orleans late in the evening the Jan prior, hours following winning the National Championship. Langham then backed out on his deal with the agent. The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know. Langham received little if anything for the agreement.

Alabama was HAMMERED by the NCAA, receiving what was then the 2nd worst punishment in history behind SMU.

Um, no:

Langham also signed and submitted an application to enter the 1993 NFL Draft, rendering him ineligible under NCAA rules, regardless of whether he had signed with an agent or not. That application was quashed in January of 1993 at the request of then-Alabama coach Gene Stallings. Stallings failed to inform the SEC or NCAA of Langham's draft application, or to declare Langham ineligible per NCAA rules. Langham played for Alabama in eleven games of the 1993 season. His actual ineligibility came to light in late November of 1993, and Alabama was eventually forced to forfeit eight wins and a tie from the 1993 season (two other games Langham played in, against LSU and Auburn, were losses on the field).

Some more "perspective".

The NCAA even calls it a "misunderstanding" of the rules.Langham certainly did not receive hundreds of thousands of dollars. All he did was sign a napkin, realize he made a mistake, then try to work with the coach to undo the mistake.

And Alabama gave up schollys, bowl eligibility, and wins for that misunderstanding.

I also believe the faculty representative who the NCAA said acted "unethically" sued the NCAA and won.

Two points I'd give are:

1) The NCAA has handed down VERY harsh punishments for lesser crimes than Bush is accused of.

2) The NCAA does not need proof.

Now you're changing your story. The point you were originally emphasizing was " . . . The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know." Where'd that point go?

Do live in Reggie's garage? Seem to be taking things pretty personally.I originally said that neither the school nor staff knew of Langham's signing with an agent. I didn't say they were not aware of him declaring for the draft...which ultimately made him ineligible. They thought they could simply remove him from the list and be done with it.

Obviously, the NCAA believed Stallings also knew of the agent signing and held that against them...without proof.

Regardless, do you think Alabama's offense is worse than what Bush and USC are being accused of?

 

[Chaka]

I just hope USC doesn't get a free pass from this. I have a hard time believing that the football program didn't know.

Why? I can understand if Reggie was driving a tricked out Escalade and wearing a ton of gold jewelry but I am not sure the staff would keep tabs on where his parents were living.

All that money didnt go to housing his family for 2 years... I am sure Bush was spending some on his wants. And Yes USC should be keeping tabs on this stuff. Failing to follow up on your players is just as bad as letting anything go.

Ridiculous statement. How do you know where the money went? When he was at 'SC Reggie had zero reputation for flaunting wealth (doing anything to raise red flags), if anything LenDale was the guy people were worried about.And you aren't seriously suggesting that schools now keep tabs on parents of athletes are you? They can barely keep tabs on the players.

 

[John Mamula]

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=ys...o&type=lgns

breaking news.

Certainly this is not a surprise. SC players have been doing this for years.

All big schools do it. Don't be an SC hater.

Some big schools do it. Some don't.

You can't be this naive.

ALL schools do it, from D1 to D3.

 

[redman]

Some perspective:

Alabama played Antonio Langham his senior year, after he signed a contract with an agent on a cocktail napkin at a bar in New Orleans late in the evening the Jan prior, hours following winning the National Championship. Langham then backed out on his deal with the agent. The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know. Langham received little if anything for the agreement.

Alabama was HAMMERED by the NCAA, receiving what was then the 2nd worst punishment in history behind SMU.

Um, no:

Langham also signed and submitted an application to enter the 1993 NFL Draft, rendering him ineligible under NCAA rules, regardless of whether he had signed with an agent or not. That application was quashed in January of 1993 at the request of then-Alabama coach Gene Stallings. Stallings failed to inform the SEC or NCAA of Langham's draft application, or to declare Langham ineligible per NCAA rules. Langham played for Alabama in eleven games of the 1993 season. His actual ineligibility came to light in late November of 1993, and Alabama was eventually forced to forfeit eight wins and a tie from the 1993 season (two other games Langham played in, against LSU and Auburn, were losses on the field).

Some more "perspective".

The NCAA even calls it a "misunderstanding" of the rules.Langham certainly did not receive hundreds of thousands of dollars. All he did was sign a napkin, realize he made a mistake, then try to work with the coach to undo the mistake.

And Alabama gave up schollys, bowl eligibility, and wins for that misunderstanding.

I also believe the faculty representative who the NCAA said acted "unethically" sued the NCAA and won.

Two points I'd give are:

1) The NCAA has handed down VERY harsh punishments for lesser crimes than Bush is accused of.

2) The NCAA does not need proof.

Now you're changing your story. The point you were originally emphasizing was " . . . The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know." Where'd that point go?

Do live in Reggie's garage? Seem to be taking things pretty personally.I originally said that neither the school nor staff knew of Langham's signing with an agent. I didn't say they were not aware of him declaring for the draft...which ultimately made him ineligible. They thought they could simply remove him from the list and be done with it.

Obviously, the NCAA believed Stallings also knew of the agent signing and held that against them...without proof.

Regardless, do you think Alabama's offense is worse than what Bush and USC are being accused of?

Yes. It's pretty obvious to me that it was Alabama's coverup that set the NCAA off. Standing alone, Langham's bar-napkin-signing with an agent doesn't appear to have implicated the university who apparently were ignorant of it. Unlike Alabama, USC has been forthcoming, and certainly hasn't run a coverup.

 

[Max Power]

I just hope USC doesn't get a free pass from this. I have a hard time believing that the football program didn't know.

Why? I can understand if Reggie was driving a tricked out Escalade and wearing a ton of gold jewelry but I am not sure the staff would keep tabs on where his parents were living.

All that money didnt go to housing his family for 2 years... I am sure Bush was spending some on his wants. And Yes USC should be keeping tabs on this stuff. Failing to follow up on your players is just as bad as letting anything go.

Ridiculous statement. How do you know where the money went? When he was at 'SC Reggie had zero reputation for flaunting wealth (doing anything to raise red flags), if anything LenDale was the guy people were worried about.And you aren't seriously suggesting that schools now keep tabs on parents of athletes are you? They can barely keep tabs on the players.

nothing ridiculous about it. No I don't know where all the money went. I just don't beleive that 300,000 went to housing for 2 years. I hear So. Cal is expensive, but 12k a month mortgage? give me a break. Regardless if Reggie flaunted his money or not, he most likely had it. I can only image his "change of address" went down in his student records. So for the school/program to not know about the house is just a joke.Again, the fact is that Reggie Bush...The star player at USC...Broke NCAA rules for atleast 24 months. The highest profile athlete at the biggest program of time, and the school didn't even care to check up. So my choices are a dirty program or a negligent one...either way its all on USC.

 

[gump]

Some perspective:

Alabama played Antonio Langham his senior year, after he signed a contract with an agent on a cocktail napkin at a bar in New Orleans late in the evening the Jan prior, hours following winning the National Championship. Langham then backed out on his deal with the agent. The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know. Langham received little if anything for the agreement.

Alabama was HAMMERED by the NCAA, receiving what was then the 2nd worst punishment in history behind SMU.

Um, no:

Langham also signed and submitted an application to enter the 1993 NFL Draft, rendering him ineligible under NCAA rules, regardless of whether he had signed with an agent or not. That application was quashed in January of 1993 at the request of then-Alabama coach Gene Stallings. Stallings failed to inform the SEC or NCAA of Langham's draft application, or to declare Langham ineligible per NCAA rules. Langham played for Alabama in eleven games of the 1993 season. His actual ineligibility came to light in late November of 1993, and Alabama was eventually forced to forfeit eight wins and a tie from the 1993 season (two other games Langham played in, against LSU and Auburn, were losses on the field).

Some more "perspective".

The NCAA even calls it a "misunderstanding" of the rules.Langham certainly did not receive hundreds of thousands of dollars. All he did was sign a napkin, realize he made a mistake, then try to work with the coach to undo the mistake.

And Alabama gave up schollys, bowl eligibility, and wins for that misunderstanding.

I also believe the faculty representative who the NCAA said acted "unethically" sued the NCAA and won.

Two points I'd give are:

1) The NCAA has handed down VERY harsh punishments for lesser crimes than Bush is accused of.

2) The NCAA does not need proof.

Now you're changing your story. The point you were originally emphasizing was " . . . The school or staff never knew, or was never proven to know." Where'd that point go?

Do live in Reggie's garage? Seem to be taking things pretty personally.I originally said that neither the school nor staff knew of Langham's signing with an agent. I didn't say they were not aware of him declaring for the draft...which ultimately made him ineligible. They thought they could simply remove him from the list and be done with it.

Obviously, the NCAA believed Stallings also knew of the agent signing and held that against them...without proof.

Regardless, do you think Alabama's offense is worse than what Bush and USC are being accused of?

Yes. It's pretty obvious to me that it was Alabama's coverup that set the NCAA off. Standing alone, Langham's bar-napkin-signing with an agent doesn't appear to have implicated the university who apparently were ignorant of it. Unlike Alabama, USC has been forthcoming, and certainly hasn't run a coverup.

You are ignoring the fact that the NCAA had no proof of a purposeful coverup, and that the guy they accused of being unethical sued them and won. In other words, the NCAA did whatever they wanted to do.You are also casually brushing off the notion that USC knew anything about their superstar getting hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's not all that crazy a notion that some USC people knew, to the rest of us non-Trojans.

USC is lucky in that some NCAA investigators have had their hand slapped from some other recent inquisitions, including some involving Alabama. They were getting completely out of control. Hopefully they've been reigned in.

 

[Chase Stuart]

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=ys...o&type=lgns

breaking news.

Certainly this is not a surprise. SC players have been doing this for years.

All big schools do it. Don't be an SC hater.

Some big schools do it. Some don't.

You can't be this naive.

ALL schools do it, from D1 to D3.

Okay. Link to Penn State doing it?

 

[Spark026]

You are ignoring the fact that the NCAA had no proof of a purposeful coverup, and that the guy they accused of being unethical sued them and won. In other words, the NCAA did whatever they wanted to do.You are also casually brushing off the notion that USC knew anything about their superstar getting hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's not all that crazy a notion that some USC people knew, to the rest of us non-Trojans.USC is lucky in that some NCAA investigators have had their hand slapped from some other recent inquisitions, including some involving Alabama. They were getting completely out of control. Hopefully they've been reigned in.

I go to the University of Alabama. What happened wasn't near as big as this, and no one within the Alabama athletic program was ever even proven to have knowledge of the infraction before hand. We got two years probation and 25 scholarships anyway.So if the NCAA gave an even penalty it'd be like 4-6 years probation, and 75 scholarships spread over the probation years for years. Like that would ever actually happen.

 

[Chaka]

I just hope USC doesn't get a free pass from this. I have a hard time believing that the football program didn't know.

Why? I can understand if Reggie was driving a tricked out Escalade and wearing a ton of gold jewelry but I am not sure the staff would keep tabs on where his parents were living.

All that money didnt go to housing his family for 2 years... I am sure Bush was spending some on his wants. And Yes USC should be keeping tabs on this stuff. Failing to follow up on your players is just as bad as letting anything go.

Ridiculous statement. How do you know where the money went? When he was at 'SC Reggie had zero reputation for flaunting wealth (doing anything to raise red flags), if anything LenDale was the guy people were worried about.And you aren't seriously suggesting that schools now keep tabs on parents of athletes are you? They can barely keep tabs on the players.

nothing ridiculous about it. No I don't know where all the money went. I just don't beleive that 300,000 went to housing for 2 years. I hear So. Cal is expensive, but 12k a month mortgage? give me a break. Regardless if Reggie flaunted his money or not, he most likely had it. I can only image his "change of address" went down in his student records. So for the school/program to not know about the house is just a joke.Again, the fact is that Reggie Bush...The star player at USC...Broke NCAA rules for atleast 24 months. The highest profile athlete at the biggest program of time, and the school didn't even care to check up. So my choices are a dirty program or a negligent one...either way its all on USC.

You're reaching.Again how does a change of address for Reggie's parents, Reggie not living with them, relate to the student and how should this be policed? All athletes at all universities records must be red flagged? And every change must be investigated? By whom? Campus police? Should they start investigating the tax returns of his parents? Sending out private investigators? Not their job in any way and if you heard about a University doing that to any student I am sure you would be just as up in arms about that injustice. Would you send your child to a University that did that?This isn't to say that had they known USC would not have covered it up but considering they have been very cooperative with the investigation it seems unlikely that they knew. And there is no reason they should have short of instituting a totalitarian campus policing policy that you seem to be in favor of.

 

[redman]

You are ignoring the fact that the NCAA had no proof of a purposeful coverup, and that the guy they accused of being unethical sued them and won. In other words, the NCAA did whatever they wanted to do.You are also casually brushing off the notion that USC knew anything about their superstar getting hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's not all that crazy a notion that some USC people knew, to the rest of us non-Trojans.USC is lucky in that some NCAA investigators have had their hand slapped from some other recent inquisitions, including some involving Alabama. They were getting completely out of control. Hopefully they've been reigned in.

I go to the University of Alabama. What happened wasn't near as big as this, and no one within the Alabama athletic program was ever even proven to have knowledge of the infraction before hand. We got two years probation and 25 scholarships anyway.So if the NCAA gave an even penalty it'd be like 4-6 years probation, and 75 scholarships spread over the probation years for years. Like that would ever actually happen.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. So Stallings' suppression of the document stating Langham's intent to enter the draft was all bogus, right? Please point out any similarity that you can find in the Reggie Bush scenario with that. The worst you can say about USC is that they were somehow negligent, but I have yet to hear anyone make a case for that that doesn't sound ridiculous. Check for changes of address? Then what? Bush and his parents did everything they could to make a deal that the university couldn't discovery. The university appears to have done all of its due diligence. When you can present to me something that allows you to plausibly say that USC then I'll start buying sanctions against the university. Until then you sound like embittered Tide fans whose team is looking for vindication in the form of, "See, they do it too!!!11one"

 

[Max Power]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished?

The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch.

I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

 

[Chaka]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

 

[Max Power]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

 

[redman]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

 

[Max Power]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

Its not my place to say that. But again, this isn't just about his parents. REGGIE was accepting gifts as well. I'm also saying if USC took 5 mins to look into it, the signs were there.

 

[Christo]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

It certainly had the power to inquire.Reggie, when we came to recruit you in HS, your family didn't have so much as a stick of butter in the refridgerator. Your parents are now living in a $750k home. Did your Dad get a promotion?Oh, and where did the car come from?

 

[redman]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

Its not my place to say that. But again, this isn't just about his parents. REGGIE was accepting gifts as well. I'm also saying if USC took 5 mins to look into it, the signs were there.

What signs?

 

[Max Power]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

Its not my place to say that. But again, this isn't just about his parents. REGGIE was accepting gifts as well. I'm also saying if USC took 5 mins to look into it, the signs were there.

What signs?

The same ones that have been listed several times a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, ClothingRed, are you under the impression USC had no idea about any of this?

 

[redman]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

Its not my place to say that. But again, this isn't just about his parents. REGGIE was accepting gifts as well. I'm also saying if USC took 5 mins to look into it, the signs were there.

What signs?

The same ones that have been listed several times a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, ClothingRed, are you under the impression USC had no idea about any of this?

Why are you under the impression that they knew about this?

 

[Max Power]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished? The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch. I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

Its not my place to say that. But again, this isn't just about his parents. REGGIE was accepting gifts as well. I'm also saying if USC took 5 mins to look into it, the signs were there.

What signs?

The same ones that have been listed several times a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, ClothingRed, are you under the impression USC had no idea about any of this?

Why are you under the impression that they knew about this?

regardless if they did. It is the schools responsibility to check on things like this. USC failed to do so. I have no problem with the NCAA punishing the school.

 

[redman]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished?

The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch.

I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

Its not my place to say that. But again, this isn't just about his parents. REGGIE was accepting gifts as well. I'm also saying if USC took 5 mins to look into it, the signs were there.

What signs?

The same ones that have been listed several timesa car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, Clothing

Red, are you under the impression USC had no idea about any of this?

Why are you under the impression that they knew about this?

regardless if they did. It is the schools responsibility to check on things like this. USC failed to do so. I have no problem with the NCAA punishing the school.

That's what I thought. Oh, and please indicate the basis for the bolded part, and what you think it means.

 

[Max Power]

Chaka, so what do you think? USC didn't know about it and therefor should not be punished?

The NCAA has a bylaw that states Universities need to maintain "proper institutional control" over its athletic programs. A player broke NCAA rules for 2 years under USC's watch.

I'm not sure why you think USC should get off without some form of punishment.

I think institutional control of a player's parents is extending university authority to far.

You do know the claim isn't just what Bush's Parents accepted? As I understand it, the bulk of the money recieved went to the Parents for a house and to pay off debt. However Reggie was given a car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, and so on...How hard is it to figure out that a family goes from 30k in debt to a living in a 750k home in a month isn't on the take?

Are you insinuating that the university had the power to investigate his parents' finances?

Its not my place to say that. But again, this isn't just about his parents. REGGIE was accepting gifts as well. I'm also saying if USC took 5 mins to look into it, the signs were there.

What signs?

The same ones that have been listed several timesa car, a $3,000 a month condo, Limo rides, vacations, Clothing

Red, are you under the impression USC had no idea about any of this?

Why are you under the impression that they knew about this?

regardless if they did. It is the schools responsibility to check on things like this. USC failed to do so. I have no problem with the NCAA punishing the school.

That's what I thought. Oh, and please indicate the basis for the bolded part, and what you think it means.

I have no Idea how schools go about checking up on these things. I would guess that most legit universities have a procedure in place. You do know that in the court documents, this Agent claims the Bush family called him panicking because the coaching staff recieved an E-mail informing them that Reggie was accepting gifts.

 

[redman]

I have no Idea how schools go about checking up on these things. I would guess that most legit universities have a procedure in place. You do know that in the court documents, this Agent claims the Bush family called him panicking because the coaching staff recieved an E-mail informing them that Reggie was accepting gifts.

I played college baseball. I was of course nowhere near the profile of college athlete that Bush was, nor was my D-1 baseball program anywhere near the profile of USC's football program. Nevertheless I've been through the NCAA advisory meetings, the signing of documents confirming my understanding of the rules, etc., etc. One thing I can tell you is that nothing about the process plants a Lojack chip in someone's ### so that the university can follow them around at all times. Generally, the idea is that you're supposed to be self-policing, and the university is supposed to do its due diligence to make sure you follow the rules, primarily by making sure you've been instructed as to the rules and aren't doing anything that's an overt violation of those rules. If a player is doing something stupid like driving a flashy new car around, like Baron Davis did at UCLA for example, then the university needs to follow up and should do so. But how aside from tailing a guy or hearing him talk about it can you know that he took a vacation for example? And even if you did, depending upon what you know even that's not necessarily suspicious because families take vacations all the time. I don't know what USC knew, which is a major reason why I ask the questions I do. You've just admitted you don't know anything about how they check up on these things. You seem like you've fallen in love with a conclusion and are looking for facts to justify it, which is ### backwards. Maybe USC was at fault, and if they were they should be punished. You'll forgive the skepticism that comes from my legal training and experience, but I'm going to need a little bit more than the assertions in "court documents" of a party with a direct financial stake in the outcome of a lawsuit.

 

[Max Power]

I have no Idea how schools go about checking up on these things. I would guess that most legit universities have a procedure in place. You do know that in the court documents, this Agent claims the Bush family called him panicking because the coaching staff recieved an E-mail informing them that Reggie was accepting gifts.

I played college baseball. I was of course nowhere near the profile of college athlete that Bush was, nor was my D-1 baseball program anywhere near the profile of USC's football program. Nevertheless I've been through the NCAA advisory meetings, the signing of documents confirming my understanding of the rules, etc., etc. One thing I can tell you is that nothing about the process plants a Lojack chip in someone's ### so that the university can follow them around at all times. Generally, the idea is that you're supposed to be self-policing, and the university is supposed to do its due diligence to make sure you follow the rules, primarily by making sure you've been instructed as to the rules and aren't doing anything that's an overt violation of those rules. If a player is doing something stupid like driving a flashy new car around, like Baron Davis did at UCLA for example, then the university needs to follow up and should do so. But how aside from tailing a guy or hearing him talk about it can you know that he took a vacation for example? And even if you did, depending upon what you know even that's not necessarily suspicious because families take vacations all the time. I don't know what USC knew, which is a major reason why I ask the questions I do. You've just admitted you don't know anything about how they check up on these things. You seem like you've fallen in love with a conclusion and are looking for facts to justify it, which is ### backwards. Maybe USC was at fault, and if they were they should be punished. You'll forgive the skepticism that comes from my legal training and experience, but I'm going to need a little bit more than the assertions in "court documents" of a party with a direct financial stake in the outcome of a lawsuit.

My only conclusion in this whole thing is that USC should not be given a free pass. Did they know about Bush taking money? IMO yes, but I can't say for sure. Everything hitting the media right now points to Bush accepting gifts, which I really don't even have an issue with. College athletes should get something for making the school Millions a year. More and more is coming out that the school might have known about it. Agents in the locker room and on the sidelines for games.I feel that if the NCAA just lets this slide for USC, It is practically telling programs to keep thier heads down and ears closed. IF USC didn't want to face sanctions, they should have checked up on Players.

 

[NoFBinLA]

They really need to increase the allowance athletes get during their playing years.

You are indeed delusional!They get education!THAT'S PRICELESS!!!/end sarcasmSeriously, these kids can't really work, the colleges and NCAA make tons of cash - I'm not saying give them a mill, but either let them work a little more or give them a little more allowance.If just to avoid situations like this - although some of these guys might grab for more cash no matter how much you give them, so it IS a slippery slope.I was (maybe still am) a big Bush booster. But beyond this story that won't die, I'm hearing enough in the community of alums and others that make me think Reggie needs to check himself a tad. Would suck if the rest of his team got slapped by losing a Championship because he couldn't wait a year or two for his $$$.

 

[TitusIII]

It's USC, the whole team could be, and probably are, riding around in agent/booster bought cars and the NCAA would turn the other cheek and put Long Beach State on probation. These cats get $120,000 in tution paid for them, that is a nice payment for playing a game....

 

[John Mamula]

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=ys...o&type=lgns

breaking news.

Certainly this is not a surprise. SC players have been doing this for years.

All big schools do it. Don't be an SC hater.

Some big schools do it. Some don't.

You can't be this naive.

ALL schools do it, from D1 to D3.

Okay. Link to Penn State doing it?

You really think Penn St doesn't do anything to violate NCAA sanctions?

You didn't know a lot of athletes while you were there did you?

Trust me, if my D3 school was breaking NCAA sanctions undercover, so was Penn freaking St.

I didn't say every school gets caught, which is your apparent confusion.

lol homer. My school is above that. No its not.

 

[gump]

You are ignoring the fact that the NCAA had no proof of a purposeful coverup, and that the guy they accused of being unethical sued them and won. In other words, the NCAA did whatever they wanted to do.You are also casually brushing off the notion that USC knew anything about their superstar getting hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's not all that crazy a notion that some USC people knew, to the rest of us non-Trojans.USC is lucky in that some NCAA investigators have had their hand slapped from some other recent inquisitions, including some involving Alabama. They were getting completely out of control. Hopefully they've been reigned in.

I go to the University of Alabama. What happened wasn't near as big as this, and no one within the Alabama athletic program was ever even proven to have knowledge of the infraction before hand. We got two years probation and 25 scholarships anyway.So if the NCAA gave an even penalty it'd be like 4-6 years probation, and 75 scholarships spread over the probation years for years. Like that would ever actually happen.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. So Stallings' suppression of the document stating Langham's intent to enter the draft was all bogus, right? Please point out any similarity that you can find in the Reggie Bush scenario with that. The worst you can say about USC is that they were somehow negligent, but I have yet to hear anyone make a case for that that doesn't sound ridiculous. Check for changes of address? Then what? Bush and his parents did everything they could to make a deal that the university couldn't discovery. The university appears to have done all of its due diligence. When you can present to me something that allows you to plausibly say that USC then I'll start buying sanctions against the university. Until then you sound like embittered Tide fans whose team is looking for vindication in the form of, "See, they do it too!!!11one"

Are you a lawyer? You are using logic that doesn't apply to NCAA investigations. The only thing proven in a court of law in the Alabama case was that the NCAA was wrong.They don't need to "present" anyone with anything. If they think you did it, you will get hammered.The rest of the world thinks you did it. And it has nothing to do with an anti-USC bias.

 

[Chase Stuart]

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=ys...o&type=lgns

breaking news.

Certainly this is not a surprise. SC players have been doing this for years.

All big schools do it. Don't be an SC hater.

Some big schools do it. Some don't.

You can't be this naive.

ALL schools do it, from D1 to D3.

Okay. Link to Penn State doing it?

You really think Penn St doesn't do anything to violate NCAA sanctions?

You didn't know a lot of athletes while you were there did you?

Trust me, if my D3 school was breaking NCAA sanctions undercover, so was Penn freaking St.

I didn't say every school gets caught, which is your apparent confusion.

lol homer. My school is above that. No its not.

Good evidence there.

 

[Doug B]

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=ys...o&type=lgns

breaking news.

Certainly this is not a surprise. SC players have been doing this for years.

All big schools do it. Don't be an SC hater.

Some big schools do it. Some don't.

You can't be this naive.

ALL schools do it, from D1 to D3.

Well, schools like Duke probably don't do it ... very much (though even in Durham there are low-profile freebies around every corner). Any school with a competitive football program does it, though.

 

[Doug B]

Good evidence there.

C'mon, Chase. I'm sure that Penn State football players don't pay for meals in local restaurants, pay for oil changes, clothes/shoes from Foot Locker, etc. That's standard stuff ... the NCAA probably doesn't even care that much.

 

[a_rackowski]

The thing is - people are upset because he took money when he felt he needed it. Doesnt matter to me because he gave that money right back to the people of New Orleans. If this is discussion of USC Paying Bush thats one thing, but discussion about what Bush took should be pushed under the Rug because he as done more than his fair share in New Orleans when they needed it most.

I respect that.

 

[Christo]

The thing is - people are upset because he took money when he felt he needed it. Doesnt matter to me because he gave that money right back to the people of New Orleans. If this is discussion of USC Paying Bush thats one thing, but discussion about what Bush took should be pushed under the Rug because he as done more than his fair share in New Orleans when they needed it most. I respect that.

Reggie "Robbin' Hood" Bush?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Good evidence there.

C'mon, Chase. I'm sure that Penn State football players don't pay for meals in local restaurants, pay for oil changes, clothes/shoes from Foot Locker, etc. That's standard stuff ... the NCAA probably doesn't even care that much.

I don't think paying for lunch is the same as receiving $280K.