Report: Reggie Bush to be stripped of Heisman (1 Viewer)

[doowain]

Assocated Press

NEW YORK - Yahoo! sports is reporting that 2005 Heisman Trophy winner Reggie Bush is expected to be stripped of the award by the end of the month

The former Southern Cal running back would become the first player in the 75-year history of the award to have the Heisman Trophy taken away. The report also says the award would be left vacant for '05.

The NCAA found major violations in USC's football program and levied serious sanctions against the school in June.

"I can tell you the Heisman Trophy trust has made no decision regarding the Reggie Bush situation," Robert Whalen, executive director of the Heisman Trophy Trust, told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

The website cited two anonymous sources close to the Heisman Trophy Trust, who say the group's investigation is almost complete and would agree with the NCAA's finding that Bush was ineligible during the '05 season.

Bush now plays for the Super Bowl champion New Orleans Saints.

_______________________________________________________

Is there anything left for the NCAA to take?

 

[Bigboy10182000]

So now he's not the best player to play that year?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The Executive Director of the Heisman Trophy Trust says that the report from Yahoo! Sports is wrong: no decision has yet been made on the issue.

 

[doowain]

So now he's not the best player to play that year?

Not to change the direction of the thread, but he wasn't anyway. Vince Young should've won the award that year. But that's neither here nor there.I think this opens up a new can of worms though. What other reasons could Heisman's be taken away for? What if someone is found to be taking PEDs?

 

[Brady Gaga]

And OJ gets to keep his?!?!?

 

[Bri]

And OJ gets to keep his?!?!?

while in college-the award is for play on the field while in school

 

[EBF]

College football is a strange institution. Successful players can make millions of dollars for their teams, but they aren't allowed to participate in the profits beyond their scholarship. It doesn't seem appropriate in a country that was built on the religion of capitalism and ambition.

Bush made millions of dollars for USC, but now that he has admitted to accepting cash on the side, the NCAA has to publicly tar and feather him to discourage its future superstars from trying to profit from their work.

College football is the fourth most popular sport in America. It generates millions of dollars in revenue without compensating the players at all. Pretty neat system and a pretty sweet deal for the NCAA. No wonder they bend over backwards to punish anyone who dares show any interest in changing the status quo (Clarett, BMW, Reggie, even Dez Bryant).

 

[coachjim]

And OJ gets to keep his?!?!?

while in college-the award is for play on the field while in school

I agree. It just seems odd. Cheating is bad. Murder is good.

 

[Duke1948]

And OJ gets to keep his?!?!?

while in college-the award is for play on the field while in school

if that is wholly true, the Heisman has no business in college sports.....integrity has got to come into play.

 

[CalBear]

And OJ gets to keep his?!?!?

Was OJ breaking the rules while he was at USC? [Well, probably, but he didn't get caught.]

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Bush made millions of dollars for USC . . .

He made millions of dollars off of USC as well. He wouldn't have been a top NFL draft pick if he hadn't gone to college.

 

[doowain]

College football is a strange institution. Successful players can make millions of dollars for their teams, but they aren't allowed to participate in the profits beyond their scholarship. It doesn't seem appropriate in a country that was built on the religion of capitalism and ambition. Bush made millions of dollars for USC, but now that he has admitted to accepting cash on the side, the NCAA has to publicly tar and feather him to discourage its future superstars from trying to profit from their work. College football is the fourth most popular sport in America. It generates millions of dollars in revenue without compensating the players at all. Pretty neat system and a pretty sweet deal for the NCAA. No wonder they bend over backwards to punish anyone who dares show any interest in changing the status quo (Clarett, BMW, Reggie, even Dez Bryant).

Very well said. Those were my thoughts as well. I've never understood that at all. I was always more of an opponent of them selling jerseys/memorabilia with these player's names on it, but they get nothing in return but a college education. While for some that may be enough....for others the NCAA makes a LOT of money off them. It's a very well run BUSINESS as it is.

 

[ROBOPUNTER]

And OJ gets to keep his?!?!?

He was an amateur murderer. That's in the rules.

 

[EBF]

Bush made millions of dollars for USC . . .

He made millions of dollars off of USC as well. He wouldn't have been a top NFL draft pick if he hadn't gone to college.

European soccer prospects routinely sign massive contracts without ever playing college soccer.Let's not pretend that the NCAA is doing these kids some great service by showcasing their talents. If there was no college football, there would still be an amateur/youth development system in place that would identify elite prospects and compensate them accordingly.

 

[Novice2]

Yahoo always trying to stir #### up

 

[az_prof]

College football is a strange institution. Successful players can make millions of dollars for their teams, but they aren't allowed to participate in the profits beyond their scholarship. It doesn't seem appropriate in a country that was built on the religion of capitalism and ambition. Bush made millions of dollars for USC, but now that he has admitted to accepting cash on the side, the NCAA has to publicly tar and feather him to discourage its future superstars from trying to profit from their work. College football is the fourth most popular sport in America. It generates millions of dollars in revenue without compensating the players at all. Pretty neat system and a pretty sweet deal for the NCAA. No wonder they bend over backwards to punish anyone who dares show any interest in changing the status quo (Clarett, BMW, Reggie, even Dez Bryant).

Very well said. Those were my thoughts as well. I've never understood that at all. I was always more of an opponent of them selling jerseys/memorabilia with these player's names on it, but they get nothing in return but a college education. While for some that may be enough....for others the NCAA makes a LOT of money off them. It's a very well run BUSINESS as it is.

It it is a business, then what is it doing in colleges? And why are public dollars supporting it?The purpose of college is to educate. That's it. For a long time we have operated under the myth or illusion or truth, that collegiate sports was about educating the "student-athlete." There were supposed to be life long lessons learned on the court and field. This was why we had college sports. Somewhere along the way that purpose has been lost. Like so much in our capitalistic society, college athletics was bought and its function divorced from the function of the institution as a whole. That's the problem. If you think it is a business, then why not let the business that profits the most, the NFL and MLB and NHL and NBA pay for it? Why not create a minor league or developmental league that the professional sports pay for and fans pay for? Let's quit pretending that these kids are learning anything. Some of them do, but many, many do not. They can't even put together a cogent sentence and they supposedly have a college degree from a "reputable" university. These kids get free rides to college, which they mostly view with disdain, the educational aspect that is, while hard working, intelligent kids can't get in or can't afford to go. And hard working and highly trained professors get paid peanuts while ignorant and banal coaches get paid more than the president of the united states or the president of the college in most cases.I wish the NCAA was consistent in enforcement. I wish that they were more vigorous in enforcing academic and ethical standards. But it is hard for me to be upset at this.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

So now he's not the best player to play that year?

Not to change the direction of the thread, but he wasn't anyway. Vince Young should've won the award that year. But that's neither here nor there.I think this opens up a new can of worms though. What other reasons could Heisman's be taken away for? What if someone is found to be taking PEDs?

When the Heisman voting was done there was little doubt that Reggie was the best and most dynamic player in college football. Bush had the second most first-place votes and the second highest total points in the history of Heisman voting at that time, behind only O.J. Simpson's 855 in 1968. Taking away the award for the best collegiate football player because he received cash is silly. Same as removing wins from a team for violations, just makes very little sense to me. This no doubt opens a huge can of worms if the reports are true.

 

[SSOG]

It it is a business, then what is it doing in colleges? And why are public dollars supporting it?The purpose of college is to educate. That's it. For a long time we have operated under the myth or illusion or truth, that collegiate sports was about educating the "student-athlete." There were supposed to be life long lessons learned on the court and field. This was why we had college sports. Somewhere along the way that purpose has been lost. Like so much in our capitalistic society, college athletics was bought and its function divorced from the function of the institution as a whole. That's the problem. If you think it is a business, then why not let the business that profits the most, the NFL and MLB and NHL and NBA pay for it? Why not create a minor league or developmental league that the professional sports pay for and fans pay for? Let's quit pretending that these kids are learning anything. Some of them do, but many, many do not. They can't even put together a cogent sentence and they supposedly have a college degree from a "reputable" university. These kids get free rides to college, which they mostly view with disdain, the educational aspect that is, while hard working, intelligent kids can't get in or can't afford to go. And hard working and highly trained professors get paid peanuts while ignorant and banal coaches get paid more than the president of the united states or the president of the college in most cases.I wish the NCAA was consistent in enforcement. I wish that they were more vigorous in enforcing academic and ethical standards. But it is hard for me to be upset at this.

Seems to me like a tirade based more on myth than fact. Are there some cases where public dollars support a football team? Yes, but USC isn't one of them- Southern Cal is a private university. There are also plenty of cases of athletic departments being completely financially autonomous from the university, and even cases of athletic departments donating MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to their universities (iirc, the UF athletic department funded itself without a dime of public money and still managed to donate $7 million to the University of Florida general scholarship fund).Do college football coaches make more than university presidents? Sometimes, but most of the time, it's because those coaches BRING IN MORE REVENUE than university presidents. A $5 million salary might look like a ton, but it's an absolute steal if that coach is responsible for bringing in $10 million in revenue (and guys like Meyer, Saban, and Carroll were surely responsible for far more than that).There are some cases where public universities are sinking money into underperforming athletic departments in an effort to build it into a money-making brand, although the same could also be said for any fledgling business venture. I agree that a lot of universities have unrealistic goals and expectations and are flushing their money away, but the blame here shouldn't be cast on the NCAA or the majority of its institutions... the blame should be cast on the specific chancellors and athletic directors and university presidents who are blowing public money on a pipe dream athletic department.

 

[Drink G2]

I think hockey in North America has the best way of doing it.

Players Ages from around 15 to 21 (depending on each league) tend to play Juniors.

There is Major Juniors In Canada where you get paid. And go pro after in some form

And regular Juniors in the States where you don't get paid. And either go pro or player college.

While College is the better route for most players as your scholarship often ends up being worth more than you would make as a Pro hockey player (whether it be in the educations worth itself, or what it garners you later in life).

But for the elite few, college would just be delaying the millions they are going to get.

If you play Major Juniors you can't play College hockey in the states (because your considered pro).

The most Elite players from NA tend to go to Major Juniors.

in the 1st round of the 2010 draft this year:

17 of 30 players were drafted from Major Juniors

3 of 30 players were drafted from Foreign leagues (Finland and Russian x2)

And the remaining 10 were drafted from regular Juniors in the states (which go on typically to College Hockey), College hockey, and one kid out of highschool.

What I'm getting to, it seems almost a very American idea that if you don't go to College you become a failure (While I won't argue it) my point is, as we see the NFL expand its influence around the globe, and with that will come more football players. Eventually some one some where will be able to start a league (Whether it be European, Canadian, or from the States) that challenges the NCAA system, because they will offer kids money to play.

America loves HS football, college football, NFL...and even CFL and Arena football seem to get some decent coverage

Can you imagine pulling the best HS players and Some of the if not thee best college players together to form a league that would funnel directly into the NFL, it would easily compete with College football now a days.

They would be able to pray upon all the things that is wrong within the NCAA, and make the transition for players easier.

- Players who are drafted wouldn't have to wait for schools who are on weird schedules classes to end to attend rookie workouts (Oregon used to be like this if they aren't now)

- Fans want to see a playoff system.

- A better ranking system that isn't biased to certain conferences (as much as possible)

just a couple of things they could do. among the endless list.

Point is, the NCAA is just asking for a league for players similar to the Major Juniors in Canada in hockey ages 15 - 21 to come in a steal their thunder pulling these kind of shenanigans.

 

[knowledge dropper]

College football is a strange institution. Successful players can make millions of dollars for their teams, but they aren't allowed to participate in the profits beyond their scholarship. It doesn't seem appropriate in a country that was built on the religion of capitalism and ambition. Bush made millions of dollars for USC, but now that he has admitted to accepting cash on the side, the NCAA has to publicly tar and feather him to discourage its future superstars from trying to profit from their work. College football is the fourth most popular sport in America. It generates millions of dollars in revenue without compensating the players at all. Pretty neat system and a pretty sweet deal for the NCAA. No wonder they bend over backwards to punish anyone who dares show any interest in changing the status quo (Clarett, BMW, Reggie, even Dez Bryant).

So you think Reggie Bush would have been able to get into USC if he did not play football?

 

[Donsmith753]

Bush made millions of dollars for USC . . .

He made millions of dollars off of USC as well. He wouldn't have been a top NFL draft pick if he hadn't gone to college.

European soccer prospects routinely sign massive contracts without ever playing college soccer.Let's not pretend that the NCAA is doing these kids some great service by showcasing their talents. If there was no college football, there would still be an amateur/youth development system in place that would identify elite prospects and compensate them accordingly.

Exactly, there is no such thing really as college soccer. It's very rare for a player of college age to not already have made it as a footballer. Professional clubs take players into their academy when they're 11/12 and if their good enough could be playing professionally at 15/16. Many successful soccer players don't even attend college as they don't have the time/have already made so much money.e.g.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/3611234.stm

Man Utd sign Rooney

Manchester United have completed the signing of Wayne Rooney from Everton in a deal which could be worth £27m.

United will pay Everton a guaranteed £20m, with that sum rising by as much as £7m, according to the 18-year-old striker's appearances and achievements.

 

[Short Corner]

Bush made millions of dollars for USC . . .

He made millions of dollars off of USC as well. He wouldn't have been a top NFL draft pick if he hadn't gone to college.

European soccer prospects routinely sign massive contracts without ever playing college soccer.Let's not pretend that the NCAA is doing these kids some great service by showcasing their talents. If there was no college football, there would still be an amateur/youth development system in place that would identify elite prospects and compensate them accordingly.

Exactly, there is no such thing really as college soccer. It's very rare for a player of college age to not already have made it as a footballer. Professional clubs take players into their academy when they're 11/12 and if their good enough could be playing professionally at 15/16. Many successful soccer players don't even attend college as they don't have the time/have already made so much money.e.g.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/3611234.stm

Man Utd sign Rooney

Manchester United have completed the signing of Wayne Rooney from Everton in a deal which could be worth £27m.

United will pay Everton a guaranteed £20m, with that sum rising by as much as £7m, according to the 18-year-old striker's appearances and achievements.

And what happens when they are NOT good enough.

 

[Donsmith753]

Exactly, there is no such thing really as college soccer. It's very rare for a player of college age to not already have made it as a footballer. Professional clubs take players into their academy when they're 11/12 and if their good enough could be playing professionally at 15/16. Many successful soccer players don't even attend college as they don't have the time/have already made so much money.

e.g.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/3611234.stm

Man Utd sign Rooney

Manchester United have completed the signing of Wayne Rooney from Everton in a deal which could be worth £27m.

United will pay Everton a guaranteed £20m, with that sum rising by as much as £7m, according to the 18-year-old striker's appearances and achievements.

And what happens when they are NOT good enough.

They usually move down the divisions until they find their level. A player on the books of a club like Manchester Utd when he's 16 could end up in the 2nd or 3rd division.Once you get to the really lower leagues it becomes part time and they find a day job. As they've spent so much of their time/effort on football they are often not very well educated and are unprepared for the real world.

The English football league system, also known as the football pyramid, is a series of interconnected leagues for club football in England (although for historical, economic and financial reasons six Welsh clubs also compete). The system has a hierarchical format with promotion and relegation between leagues at different levels, allowing even the smallest club the possibility of ultimately rising to the very top of the system. There are more than 140 leagues, containing more than 480 divisions. The exact number of clubs varies from year to year as clubs join and leave leagues or fold altogether, but an estimated average of 15 clubs per division implies that more than 7,000 clubs are members of a league in the English football league system.

As you can see from this there are a huge number of clubs for players to move down to. I should point out that the main leagues in england consist of only 92 clubs. This doesn't take into account Scottish, Irish or Welsh football leagues.

 

[ROBOPUNTER]

Can you guys take the soccer stuff to www.futbolguys.com? It doesn't have a place here

 

[Donsmith753]

Can you guys take the soccer stuff to www.futbolguys.com? It doesn't have a place here

It's called drawing comparisons.

 

[Short Corner]

Exactly, there is no such thing really as college soccer. It's very rare for a player of college age to not already have made it as a footballer. Professional clubs take players into their academy when they're 11/12 and if their good enough could be playing professionally at 15/16. Many successful soccer players don't even attend college as they don't have the time/have already made so much money.

e.g.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/3611234.stm

Man Utd sign Rooney

Manchester United have completed the signing of Wayne Rooney from Everton in a deal which could be worth £27m.

United will pay Everton a guaranteed £20m, with that sum rising by as much as £7m, according to the 18-year-old striker's appearances and achievements.

And what happens when they are NOT good enough.

They usually move down the divisions until they find their level. A player on the books of a club like Manchester Utd when he's 16 could end up in the 2nd or 3rd division.Once you get to the really lower leagues it becomes part time and they find a day job. As they've spent so much of their time/effort on football they are often not very well educated and are unprepared for the real world.

The English football league system, also known as the football pyramid, is a series of interconnected leagues for club football in England (although for historical, economic and financial reasons six Welsh clubs also compete). The system has a hierarchical format with promotion and relegation between leagues at different levels, allowing even the smallest club the possibility of ultimately rising to the very top of the system. There are more than 140 leagues, containing more than 480 divisions. The exact number of clubs varies from year to year as clubs join and leave leagues or fold altogether, but an estimated average of 15 clubs per division implies that more than 7,000 clubs are members of a league in the English football league system.

As you can see from this there are a huge number of clubs for players to move down to. I should point out that the main leagues in england consist of only 92 clubs. This doesn't take into account Scottish, Irish or Welsh football leagues.

I coach basketball in Germany so I know how the club system works. The implication that there are more than 7000 clubs in play is correct only if you assume that each club supports at most one team, which is not the case. Having been on both ends, I think the club system is much better than the interscholastics we have in the US when it comes to individual player development. Yeah, there are a lot of clubs to play for, but how many can actually make a living doing so?

 

[renesauz]

College football is a strange institution. Successful players can make millions of dollars for their teams, but they aren't allowed to participate in the profits beyond their scholarship. It doesn't seem appropriate in a country that was built on the religion of capitalism and ambition. Bush made millions of dollars for USC, but now that he has admitted to accepting cash on the side, the NCAA has to publicly tar and feather him to discourage its future superstars from trying to profit from their work. College football is the fourth most popular sport in America. It generates millions of dollars in revenue without compensating the players at all. Pretty neat system and a pretty sweet deal for the NCAA. No wonder they bend over backwards to punish anyone who dares show any interest in changing the status quo (Clarett, BMW, Reggie, even Dez Bryant).

Very well said. Those were my thoughts as well. I've never understood that at all. I was always more of an opponent of them selling jerseys/memorabilia with these player's names on it, but they get nothing in return but a college education. While for some that may be enough....for others the NCAA makes a LOT of money off them. It's a very well run BUSINESS as it is.

It it is a business, then what is it doing in colleges? And why are public dollars supporting it?The purpose of college is to educate. That's it. For a long time we have operated under the myth or illusion or truth, that collegiate sports was about educating the "student-athlete." There were supposed to be life long lessons learned on the court and field. This was why we had college sports. Somewhere along the way that purpose has been lost. Like so much in our capitalistic society, college athletics was bought and its function divorced from the function of the institution as a whole. That's the problem. If you think it is a business, then why not let the business that profits the most, the NFL and MLB and NHL and NBA pay for it? Why not create a minor league or developmental league that the professional sports pay for and fans pay for? Let's quit pretending that these kids are learning anything. Some of them do, but many, many do not. They can't even put together a cogent sentence and they supposedly have a college degree from a "reputable" university. These kids get free rides to college, which they mostly view with disdain, the educational aspect that is, while hard working, intelligent kids can't get in or can't afford to go. And hard working and highly trained professors get paid peanuts while ignorant and banal coaches get paid more than the president of the united states or the president of the college in most cases.I wish the NCAA was consistent in enforcement. I wish that they were more vigorous in enforcing academic and ethical standards. But it is hard for me to be upset at this.

We need to remember a couple of facts here. First of all...only the ultra-elite players are "underpaid" by the college system. The overwhelming majority of the other guys don't make it into the pros, and even many who make it there only stick a year or two at pro minimum wages. Second, many, if not MOST of these guys would be playing similar sports regardless, because they're jocks. IE: they're playing far more for the love of the sport then because of what the sport is giving them. Third, all student athletes understand these rules before they go to college. Most are excited just to be able to keep playing...all agree to the rules.The problem isn't so much with the NCAA as it is with pro football to begin with. If a guy is talented enough to go in the first or second round of the NFL draft, he should be allowed to do so, regardless of whether he's a freshman or a senior.

 

[Donsmith753]

They usually move down the divisions until they find their level. A player on the books of a club like Manchester Utd when he's 16 could end up in the 2nd or 3rd division.

Once you get to the really lower leagues it becomes part time and they find a day job. As they've spent so much of their time/effort on football they are often not very well educated and are unprepared for the real world.

The English football league system, also known as the football pyramid, is a series of interconnected leagues for club football in England (although for historical, economic and financial reasons six Welsh clubs also compete). The system has a hierarchical format with promotion and relegation between leagues at different levels, allowing even the smallest club the possibility of ultimately rising to the very top of the system. There are more than 140 leagues, containing more than 480 divisions. The exact number of clubs varies from year to year as clubs join and leave leagues or fold altogether, but an estimated average of 15 clubs per division implies that more than 7,000 clubs are members of a league in the English football league system.

As you can see from this there are a huge number of clubs for players to move down to. I should point out that the main leagues in england consist of only 92 clubs. This doesn't take into account Scottish, Irish or Welsh football leagues.

I coach basketball in Germany so I know how the club system works. The implication that there are more than 7000 clubs in play is correct only if you assume that each club supports at most one team, which is not the case. Having been on both ends, I think the club system is much better than the interscholastics we have in the US when it comes to individual player development. Yeah, there are a lot of clubs to play for, but how many can actually make a living doing so?

This is the key point. I initally got into this to simply point out that "college soccer" didn't exist as a means of making it as a professional because most players would have made it on some level by that point in their life anyway.

 

[Donsmith753]

College football is a strange institution. Successful players can make millions of dollars for their teams, but they aren't allowed to participate in the profits beyond their scholarship. It doesn't seem appropriate in a country that was built on the religion of capitalism and ambition.

Bush made millions of dollars for USC, but now that he has admitted to accepting cash on the side, the NCAA has to publicly tar and feather him to discourage its future superstars from trying to profit from their work.

College football is the fourth most popular sport in America. It generates millions of dollars in revenue without compensating the players at all. Pretty neat system and a pretty sweet deal for the NCAA. No wonder they bend over backwards to punish anyone who dares show any interest in changing the status quo (Clarett, BMW, Reggie, even Dez Bryant).

Very well said. Those were my thoughts as well. I've never understood that at all. I was always more of an opponent of them selling jerseys/memorabilia with these player's names on it, but they get nothing in return but a college education. While for some that may be enough....for others the NCAA makes a LOT of money off them. It's a very well run BUSINESS as it is.

It it is a business, then what is it doing in colleges? And why are public dollars supporting it?The purpose of college is to educate. That's it. For a long time we have operated under the myth or illusion or truth, that collegiate sports was about educating the "student-athlete." There were supposed to be life long lessons learned on the court and field. This was why we had college sports. Somewhere along the way that purpose has been lost. Like so much in our capitalistic society, college athletics was bought and its function divorced from the function of the institution as a whole.

That's the problem.

If you think it is a business, then why not let the business that profits the most, the NFL and MLB and NHL and NBA pay for it? Why not create a minor league or developmental league that the professional sports pay for and fans pay for? Let's quit pretending that these kids are learning anything. Some of them do, but many, many do not. They can't even put together a cogent sentence and they supposedly have a college degree from a "reputable" university. These kids get free rides to college, which they mostly view with disdain, the educational aspect that is, while hard working, intelligent kids can't get in or can't afford to go. And hard working and highly trained professors get paid peanuts while ignorant and banal coaches get paid more than the president of the united states or the president of the college in most cases.

I wish the NCAA was consistent in enforcement. I wish that they were more vigorous in enforcing academic and ethical standards. But it is hard for me to be upset at this.

We need to remember a couple of facts here. First of all...only the ultra-elite players are "underpaid" by the college system. The overwhelming majority of the other guys don't make it into the pros, and even many who make it there only stick a year or two at pro minimum wages. Second, many, if not MOST of these guys would be playing similar sports regardless, because they're jocks. IE: they're playing far more for the love of the sport then because of what the sport is giving them. Third, all student athletes understand these rules before they go to college. Most are excited just to be able to keep playing...all agree to the rules.The problem isn't so much with the NCAA as it is with pro football to begin with. If a guy is talented enough to go in the first or second round of the NFL draft, he should be allowed to do so, regardless of whether he's a freshman or a senior.

While I can see the point in principle I think it's irresponsible of the NFL to do this and leave players that fail unprepared for life after football. Making them atleast attend college is definately a plus.

 

[renesauz]

College football is a strange institution. Successful players can make millions of dollars for their teams, but they aren't allowed to participate in the profits beyond their scholarship. It doesn't seem appropriate in a country that was built on the religion of capitalism and ambition.

Bush made millions of dollars for USC, but now that he has admitted to accepting cash on the side, the NCAA has to publicly tar and feather him to discourage its future superstars from trying to profit from their work.

College football is the fourth most popular sport in America. It generates millions of dollars in revenue without compensating the players at all. Pretty neat system and a pretty sweet deal for the NCAA. No wonder they bend over backwards to punish anyone who dares show any interest in changing the status quo (Clarett, BMW, Reggie, even Dez Bryant).

Very well said. Those were my thoughts as well. I've never understood that at all. I was always more of an opponent of them selling jerseys/memorabilia with these player's names on it, but they get nothing in return but a college education. While for some that may be enough....for others the NCAA makes a LOT of money off them. It's a very well run BUSINESS as it is.

It it is a business, then what is it doing in colleges? And why are public dollars supporting it?The purpose of college is to educate. That's it. For a long time we have operated under the myth or illusion or truth, that collegiate sports was about educating the "student-athlete." There were supposed to be life long lessons learned on the court and field. This was why we had college sports. Somewhere along the way that purpose has been lost. Like so much in our capitalistic society, college athletics was bought and its function divorced from the function of the institution as a whole.

That's the problem.

If you think it is a business, then why not let the business that profits the most, the NFL and MLB and NHL and NBA pay for it? Why not create a minor league or developmental league that the professional sports pay for and fans pay for? Let's quit pretending that these kids are learning anything. Some of them do, but many, many do not. They can't even put together a cogent sentence and they supposedly have a college degree from a "reputable" university. These kids get free rides to college, which they mostly view with disdain, the educational aspect that is, while hard working, intelligent kids can't get in or can't afford to go. And hard working and highly trained professors get paid peanuts while ignorant and banal coaches get paid more than the president of the united states or the president of the college in most cases.

I wish the NCAA was consistent in enforcement. I wish that they were more vigorous in enforcing academic and ethical standards. But it is hard for me to be upset at this.

We need to remember a couple of facts here. First of all...only the ultra-elite players are "underpaid" by the college system. The overwhelming majority of the other guys don't make it into the pros, and even many who make it there only stick a year or two at pro minimum wages. Second, many, if not MOST of these guys would be playing similar sports regardless, because they're jocks. IE: they're playing far more for the love of the sport then because of what the sport is giving them. Third, all student athletes understand these rules before they go to college. Most are excited just to be able to keep playing...all agree to the rules.The problem isn't so much with the NCAA as it is with pro football to begin with. If a guy is talented enough to go in the first or second round of the NFL draft, he should be allowed to do so, regardless of whether he's a freshman or a senior.

While I can see the point in principle I think it's irresponsible of the NFL to do this and leave players that fail unprepared for life after football. Making them atleast attend college is definately a plus.

That's why that important caveat is there...first and second rounders. Seventh round dreamers go the old fashioned route.

 

[Donsmith753]

We need to remember a couple of facts here. First of all...only the ultra-elite players are "underpaid" by the college system. The overwhelming majority of the other guys don't make it into the pros, and even many who make it there only stick a year or two at pro minimum wages. Second, many, if not MOST of these guys would be playing similar sports regardless, because they're jocks. IE: they're playing far more for the love of the sport then because of what the sport is giving them. Third, all student athletes understand these rules before they go to college. Most are excited just to be able to keep playing...all agree to the rules.The problem isn't so much with the NCAA as it is with pro football to begin with. If a guy is talented enough to go in the first or second round of the NFL draft, he should be allowed to do so, regardless of whether he's a freshman or a senior.

While I can see the point in principle I think it's irresponsible of the NFL to do this and leave players that fail unprepared for life after football. Making them atleast attend college is definately a plus.

That's why that important caveat is there...first and second rounders. Seventh round dreamers go the old fashioned route.

So Jamarcus is good to go straight in then? I know that's a bad example as it doesn't appear that college has done him any good.I can see how it wouldn't be a problem for a guy like Peyton Manning but for every Peyton there's 10 busts. Now if the NFL teams were to work on educating young guys who came out early alongside their football then that would work but it's hard to believe any team saying "yeah don't go out and run routes, stay in here and read to kill a mockingbird"

 

[Breesisdaman]

I cant believe they would take away a Heisman for something that did not even affect the performance on the field. OJ Simpson will still have his by the way.

 

[Donsmith753]

I cant believe they would take away a Heisman for something that did not even affect the performance on the field. OJ Simpson will still have his by the way.

I'm sure he's really broken up about it.

 

[az_prof]

Do college football coaches make more than university presidents? Sometimes, but most of the time, it's because those coaches BRING IN MORE REVENUE than university presidents. A $5 million salary might look like a ton, but it's an absolute steal if that coach is responsible for bringing in $10 million in revenue (and guys like Meyer, Saban, and Carroll were surely responsible for far more than that).There are some cases where public universities are sinking money into underperforming athletic departments in an effort to build it into a money-making brand, although the same could also be said for any fledgling business venture. I agree that a lot of universities have unrealistic goals and expectations and are flushing their money away, but the blame here shouldn't be cast on the NCAA or the majority of its institutions... the blame should be cast on the specific chancellors and athletic directors and university presidents who are blowing public money on a pipe dream athletic department.

First, I am willing to bet that college football coaches make more than the president of the college at more than 75% of division one universities. I have never heard of a case where the president made more--but I am sure there are a few.Second, you keep using the language of business. If it is a business, then why is it a part of the univeristy and college system? What is the purpose of college athletics? Is it to make money for the university? I don't think that was its original purpose. In fact, I know it wasn't. Yet you justify high paid football coaches based on the claim that they make more money for the university--a business argument. Incidentally, that claim would need to look at the cost of the facilities and the cost of scholarships and the cost of support staff, the cost of maintenance crews, the cost of educational support for players, the cost of travel, lodging and food for 60 some people to all their games, and the cost of the stadium construction and maintenance. I don't think any of the cost estimates ever look at the true cost to the university of the sports programs. I have never seen a good analysis anyway and I have been in colleges and universities all my life working.The whole system is so corrupted by money--that's the problem. I support Bush being punished because his case is symptomatic of that corruption.

 

[doowain]

I cant believe they would take away a Heisman for something that did not even affect the performance on the field. OJ Simpson will still have his by the way.

I'm sure he's really broken up about it.

If he's not....that speaks even more to his sparkling morals.

 

[Donsmith753]

I cant believe they would take away a Heisman for something that did not even affect the performance on the field. OJ Simpson will still have his by the way.

I'm sure he's really broken up about it.

If he's not....that speaks even more to his sparkling morals.

He dated a Kardashian.

 

[ROBOPUNTER]

Can you guys take the soccer stuff to www.futbolguys.com? It doesn't have a place here

It's called drawing comparisons.

It can be called anything, but it's bad.

 

[kingcoin1]

All I care about is Reggie's mindset for week 1. Does this affect his week 1 performance. No.

 

[SSOG]

First, I am willing to bet that college football coaches make more than the president of the college at more than 75% of division one universities. I have never heard of a case where the president made more--but I am sure there are a few.Second, you keep using the language of business. If it is a business, then why is it a part of the univeristy and college system? What is the purpose of college athletics? Is it to make money for the university? I don't think that was its original purpose. In fact, I know it wasn't. Yet you justify high paid football coaches based on the claim that they make more money for the university--a business argument. Incidentally, that claim would need to look at the cost of the facilities and the cost of scholarships and the cost of support staff, the cost of maintenance crews, the cost of educational support for players, the cost of travel, lodging and food for 60 some people to all their games, and the cost of the stadium construction and maintenance. I don't think any of the cost estimates ever look at the true cost to the university of the sports programs. I have never seen a good analysis anyway and I have been in colleges and universities all my life working.The whole system is so corrupted by money--that's the problem. I support Bush being punished because his case is symptomatic of that corruption.

Please, don't go trying to pretend that major colleges and universities aren't businesses, themselves. It's not like they're these altruistic endeavors who are educating students with absolutely no profit margin out of the goodness of their own hearts. It's not like professors choose which college employs them based on which gives them the opportunity to reach the most students. Higher education is a business just like any other. And of the 343 institutions with a men's basketball team, a third of them are private universities that receive no government funding.I also think you're selling the benefits of college athletics short. You act like college athletics provide absolutely no benefit to the college itself unless they're directly handing over money. That's simply not true. College athletic departments wind up funding lots of construction that benefits the entire student body, from gyms which all students are free to work out at to arenas that wind up hosting much more than just sporting events. College athletic departments provide students with subsidized or discounted tickets (in most cases, outright FREE tickets). College athletics provide the university with free advertising opportunities (every time a network airs a game, they're required to reserve a certain number of ad spots for the universities and conferences involved), as well as the free advertising that nationally televised events themselves provide. How many people had heard of Appalachian State before they beat Michigan in the Big House? How many people had heard of them afterward? And do you honestly believe that nobody has applied to or chosen a college based on that college's athletic department? The more applications a university receives, the more it has to choose from and ultimately, the stronger the student body (and, consequently, the prestige that being a graduate from that university carries). How many university websites list or "athletic excellence" as a reason for enrolling there? Also, athletic departments undoubtedly build school pride, which I'm sure results in a higher enrollment in alumni associations, which again funnels more money into the university itself.So sure, while it's possible no analysis has yet found a good estimate of the cost of a sports program, I would say that no analysis has found a good estimate of the total benefits of a sports program, either.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Bush made millions of dollars for USC . . .

He made millions of dollars off of USC as well. He wouldn't have been a top NFL draft pick if he hadn't gone to college.

I'm not sure about Reggie Bush but I am convinced Adrian Peterson would have been a first round NFL draft pick out of high school. Marshall Faulk would have been another. I know the NFL is not the NBA, but talent is talent. And a small percentage of players would go straight to the NFL from high school if it were approved. But of course it never will be.

 

[Breesisdaman]

I cant believe they would take away a Heisman for something that did not even affect the performance on the field. OJ Simpson will still have his by the way.

I'm sure he's really broken up about it.

If he's not....that speaks even more to his sparkling morals.

Its not the freaking Mrs America pagent its football. Heisman is for the best football player and does not even take into account character issues when they vote on it. Why should it become an issue then in taking it away? By the way Bush was a kid when this all went down. The NCAA is screwed up at every turn IMO. They cant get away from the stupid bowl system and develop a true playoff system like every other competitive sport and they look stupid as hell here with this Heisman stuff. Because the best player in football took bribes from agents he losses something he earned on the field. What is this the olympics? Oh wait, they dont even do that for the olympics!! As long as Bush didnt juice up, he was the best Athlete that season. End of story/

 

[Limp Ditka]

I cant believe they would take away a Heisman for something that did not even affect the performance on the field. OJ Simpson will still have his by the way.

OJ was eligible for all of the games he played the year he won it.Reggie Bush, he wasn't.

 

[Short Corner]

Bush made millions of dollars for USC . . .

He made millions of dollars off of USC as well. He wouldn't have been a top NFL draft pick if he hadn't gone to college.

I'm not sure about Reggie Bush but I am convinced Adrian Peterson would have been a first round NFL draft pick out of high school. Marshall Faulk would have been another. I know the NFL is not the NBA, but talent is talent. And a small percentage of players would go straight to the NFL from high school if it were approved. But of course it never will be.

So Faulk was good enough out of HS to make the leap, yet he ended up at SDSU?